European company sell off its uranium asset to Australian company (unprofitable?)
European Uranium to sell Slovakia uranium projects to Forte Energy Proactive Investors, by Deborah Bacal 4 April 14 European Uranium Resources (CVE:EUU) said it has agreed to sell its Kuriskova and Novoveska Huta uranium projects in Slovakia to Australia’s Forte Energy NL (ASX:FTE) (LON:FTE) for approximately $8.5 million plus a production royalty. The deal represents the sale of the company’s only remaining mineral projects. It told investors in a statement Friday that it now plans to investigate mineral projects to option or acquire in “multiple commodities” in Europe, with the deal today giving the company the initial funding to implement its business strategy.
The binding heads of agreement with Forte, a dual-listed exploration and development company with a portfolio of uranium assets in the Republics of Mauritania and Guinea, is subject to regulatory and shareholder approvals of both companies…..
….French nuclear energy giant Areva currently holds a 4.5% stake in Forte. http://www.proactiveinvestors.com/companies/news/53229/european-uranium-to-sell-slovakia-uranium-projects-to-forte-energy-53229.html
Queensland government incapable of properly monitoring Mining industries
Summary of Auditor-General’s report on mines Tony Moore SMH, 4 April 14 What was revealed in the Auditor General’s report on the monitoring of Queensland’s resource and waste industries by the Departments of Environment and Heritage Protection and Natural Resources and Mines.
Communications
“Poor data and inadequate systems continue to hinder EHP’s planning and risk assessments. As a result, EHP cannot target its monitoring and enforcement efforts to where they are most needed.”
This situation is exacerbated by the lack of coordination and sharing of relevant information across agencies, particularly between EHP and NRM……..http://www.smh.com.au/queensland/summary-of-auditorgenerals-report-on-mines-20140404-362w5.html
Three respected Aborigines resign from Country Liberal Party
Bush Aborigines are fed up AMOS AIKMAN THE AUSTRALIAN APRIL 04, 2014
TENSION between Aborigines who have remained poor while Darwin has been transformed from a disaster zone after Cyclone Tracy to a “Gateway to Asia” city now has finally burst through the seams, ripping apart the Northern Territory government.
The imminent departure from the ruling Country Liberal Party of three traditional, culturally respected indigenous members not only plunges the government into crisis but could create a watershed for indigenous representation in Australia. Aboriginal votes that enabled the CLP to win power failed to deliver a government in which a majority of Aboriginal members could influence policymaking, resources allocation and the public service to anywhere near their — or, it appears, their constituents’ — satisfaction……….
Since the start of self-government in 1978, the Territory has been a mendicant state administering large amounts of federal funds for the notional benefit of Aborigines. However, a parade of reports has revealed that much of the money is skimmed off before it reaches the ground and, despite the substantial spending, living standards and health outcomes have barely improved in 30 years.
Some indicators, particularly those for children, are going backwards.
Successive governments have tried to contain the competing interests of remote and urban voting constituencies. The division is a socioeconomic one that falls uncomfortably along racial lines. In effect, these two constituencies are hankering for the same government resources rather than, as might be the case elsewhere, partnering in the economy……
Chief Minister Adam Giles was installed in March last year with the help of so-called “bush members”, who hoped the change would bring stability………
Anderson, in particular, objected to Giles axing the indigenous advancement department she had been in charge of, and scrapping a committee established by Mills to bring feedback from the bush directly to the cabinet table.
Giles sacked her from his ministry in September, in a move some now view as counterproductive. Gradually it became clear that, by ousting Mills, Giles and his allies had sundered the CLP in much the same way Julia Gillard did Labor when she replaced Kevin Rudd……….
Giles has focused his attention, at times forcefully, on laying the groundwork for major private-sector investment. While this may be an admirable long-term goal, it has distracted from the small-scale change and consultative policymaking bush residents voted for.
The result has been a chorus of questions about whether Aboriginal people will be drivers or passengers in development of their own land — the sort of concerns that fostered the Aboriginal land rights movement. This has clearly been a problem for Kurrupuwu, Anderson and Lee.
“Our concerns for a long period of time has been that we haven’t delivered for the bush,” Anderson told the ABC recently………
The risk for the federal government is self-evident. While the nation debates controversial racial discrimination legislation, and edges towards a referendum on constitutional recognition of indigenous people, politicians exchange racial epithets and ugly allegations in the Territory……… http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/bush-aborigines-are-fed-up/story-e6frg6z6-1226873925714#
Inaction on Climate Change will harm Western Australia (- THE AUSTRALIAN Newspaper!)
WA has a ‘lot to lose‘ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/latest/wa-has-a-lot-to-lose/story-e6frg90f-1226873306480 APRIL 03, 2014 West Australia stands to lose a great deal in terms of economic growth and quality of life as a result of inaction on climate change, according to a paper released today by Businesses for A Clean Economy.
The group – an alliance of the Carbon Markets Investors Association, the Clean Energy Council, the Climate Institute, the Investor Group on Climate Change and the WWF – said the state’s long term economic resilience and prosperity depend on national policies that factor in carbon pricing, regulation and catalyse private sector finance and investment.
Complementary measures such as the RET and energy efficiency programs, can provide for a decarbonised, productive and balanced growth pathway for WA’s economy.
“WA and the Clean Economy” highlights for Western Australia the specific impacts, costs of inaction and the economic opportunities in relation to climate change across a range of economic and environmental factors including employment, tourism, agriculture, and lifestyle and quantifies the risk of complacency and inaction.
Risks – key points
- Significant risk to WA coastal infrastructure due to WA’s sea levels rising at twice the global average;
- A 30% yield loss by 2050 due to WA’s drying trend (already causing a 43% reduction of wheat and winter crop production across the southwest wheat belt in 2010- 11 compared to the previous season).
- Threats to WA’s attractiveness as a tourist destination due to the loss of marine biodiversity caused by continued increases in oceanwater pH levels.
“The risks to Western Australia from inaction on climate change are alarming, more so because it is clear that reasonable policies could not only reduce the negative environmental impact but importantly provide WA with considerable opportunity and economic benefit,” said Kirsten Rose, CEO, Sustainable Energy Association of Australia.
“To unlock the opportunities in Western Australia business needs a long term, stable, cost effective policy that can achieve long term emission reduction targets now and facilitate the transition to a competitive low carbon economy”.
Opportunities – Key points
- 4500 new direct WA jobs created by the renewable energy sector by 2030;
- Identified opportunities for WA clean investment in new jobs in manufacturing, retail and agriculture as well as energy;
- Investment in WA’s regional economies due to abundant renewable energy resources (8% of WA’s produced energy being already being renewable)
“Western Australia’s access to the world’s best renewable resources; sun, wind, marine provide the opportunity for WA to lead low carbon growth, attract ongoing investment and create jobs,” said Kirsten Rose.
“WA has significant scope to further diversify the state’s economic development as well as efficiently reduce its emissions and accelerate the transition to a clean economy,” said Ms Rose.
“Business for a Clean Economy are calling for a return to bipartisan support for a market- based price mechanism linked to international markets, to provide greater certainty for business and stimulate investment in new technologies,” said Andrew Petersen, CEO, Sustainable Business Australia.
The B4CE (Businesses for a Clean Economy) Initiative was formed in 2011 by The Carbon Markets Investors Association, the Clean Energy Council, the Climate Institute, the Investor Group on Climate Change and the WWF. Sustainable Business Australia is the B4CE Secretariat. The Initiative has over 400 signatories from a broad range of business and industry sectors. (www.b4ce.com.au)
Clive Palmer very flustered over Climate Change, contradicts his Western Australian candidate
Palmer loses cool in climate debate http://www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2014/4/4/policy-politics/palmer-loses-cool-climate-debate Palmer United Palmer leader Clive Palmer has lashed out an ABC interviewer who was probing the MP about his dismissal of the IPCC climate consensus.
In a debate with economist Ross Garnaut on Lateline last night, interviewer Tony Jones questioned Mr Palmer’s dismissal of the IPCC process and suggestion the world needed a “proper report” on climate change, prompting a reply of “shut up” from the mining magnate.
CLIVE PALMER: I don’t want to be interrupted. Well, I haven’t made my point.
TONY JONES: Well, I’m sorry, every now and then …
CLIVE PALMER: “Well, I’m sorry.” Why don’t you shut up for a while and let me finish?
TONY JONES: Every now and then – every now and then …
CLIVE PALMER: Why don’t you just keep quiet while – why don’t you just keep quiet and let me finish what I’m saying? “Every now and then,” come on, we’ll have a fight if you want to. But why don’t you just shut up while I’ll can say what I want to say? I’m saying that 100 per cent of carbon, we’ve got to reduce it. 97 per cent comes from nature. Let’s reduce it, let’s look at both areas, not just look at industry, not just take away our jobs, up our electricity prices…
Confusion over BHP’s plans about its uranium projects
Which of these reports is true?For profit, environment and efficiency, Australia could have renewable-energy powered high speed rail
Australia Urged to Build High-Speed Rail System Powered By Renewable Energy, EV World 4 April 14, Proposed high-speed rail system would connect 12 major regional towns, and the cities of Brisbane, the Gold Coast, Newcastle, Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne.
A renewable energy powered high speed rail service linking the east-coast Australian cities of Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane would cut the nation’s regional transport emissions by almost 30 per cent, while providing a profitable and popular service, a new report has found.
The report – a collaborative effort from climate change think tank Beyond Zero Emissions (BZE), the German Aerospace Centre (DLR) and the University of Melbourne’s Energy Research Institute – explores the potential for high speed rail in Australia.
Two years in the making – and due for release next week – the report’s recommends the development of a high speed rail network along the lines of the recent government study; connecting 12 major regional towns, and the cities of Brisbane, the Gold Coast, Newcastle, Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne……….. http://evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=32762
BHP getting out of uranium mining
BHP weighs divestment options Mining Weekly By: Esmarie Swanepoel 1st April 2014 PERTH – Mining giant BHP Billiton on Tuesday said it was “reviewing” and “assessing” its divestment options, after media outlets in Australia reported that the company was considering a $20-billion demerger plan……..As we have said previously, the simplification of our portfolio is a priority and is something we have pursued for several years,” BHP said in response to the market speculation, adding that in the last two years, the company had completed a number of divestments in Australia, the US, Canada, South Africa and the UK.
Divestments included petroleum, copper, coal, mineral sands, uranium and diamond assets……….
BHP told shareholders that the company would actively continue to study the next phase of simplification, including its structural options, but noted that it would only pursue those avenues that maximised value for the company’s shareholders.
BHP CEO Andrew Mackenzie has previously said that Australia would remain a focal point for the company, pointing out that the country accounted for about 70% of its profits……..http://www.miningweekly.com/article/bhp-weighs-divestment-options-2014-04-01
Scott Ludlam’s speech went viral -by 13 March 700,000 viewings
Scott Ludlam’s speech worth paying attention to, SMH, Elizabeth Farrelly 13 March 14 Australian politics measures itself in landmark speeches. Menzies’ ”forgotten people” speech, 1942. Keating’s ”Redfern” speech, 1992. Gillard’s misogyny speech, Hockey’s entitlement speech. And now, Scott Ludlam’s ”Welcome to WA, Tony Abbott” speech.
I like such speeches, if only for their comforting illusion that there’s more to our political life than the mundane squabble over money and resources. Not exactly ”I have a dream” territory, perhaps, but they do at least imply core principle.
And apparently I’m not the only one hungry for it. Sorry to say I don’t mean our political leaders, whose indifference to the parlay for which we pay them is so profound that Ludlam found himself delivering his adjournment speech to a near-empty Senate, occupied by just one of his 75 elected colleagues.
But it was the populace came thundering through on horseback. Ten days on YouTube garnered Ludlam’s speech 700,000 views; more than Cate Blanchett’s Oscar win. This kind of response makes Australian politicians’ disdain for principle the more surprising. Take, for example, Tony Abbott’s recent address to the ForestWorks dinner. It was a classic crowd-pleaser, a cynical exercise in wrongful and duplicitous nonsense.
Abbott told the logging industry lobby group that ”too much” of our pristine forest is protected, that loggers are the ”true conservationists” and that the Greens – which he characterised as ”the devil” – are to blame for Tasmania’s high unemployment, low life-expectancy and low school retention rates. It was dumb. It was embarrassing. But it worked.
The subtext was appeasement; a placatory sop to an angry state for Abbott’s shameless downgrade of his national broadband network optic fibre promise to slow old copper.
Against such background blather, statements of principle stand in stark contrast. True, even principled speeches can have destructive consequences. Menzies’ ”forgotten people” speech, in validating the middle classes, helped justify a century of bloat and sprawl. Helped feed the entitlement from which we are now forced painfully to resile.
Far more dangerous, however, are those speeches that appear principled and are not. A comparison of Ludlam’s ”Abbott” speech with Joe Hockey’s ”entitlement” speech is edifying here. The first, marked by a kind of reckless candour (driven, no doubt, by Labor’s threat to redirect preferences on April 5) is a lucid, point-by-point explication of principle. The other merely deploys principle to cloak economic expedience.
As opponents, the Liberals and the Greens could hardly be more adamant. Yet the weird thing is, if Hockey were serious about ending entitlement he would adopt just about every principle Ludlam so eloquently voiced……..
by far the bigger and more urgent picture is how entitlement on all our parts, and most especially the parts of wealthy hyper-consumers, drives our wanton planetary destruction.
Ludlam’s speech showed where Hockey’s reasoning should have taken him, if he’d only had the courage and imagination to go there.
Ludlam begged Abbott to see Western Australia as ”a place where the drought never ended, where climate change from land clearing and fossil fuel combustion is a lived reality that is already costing jobs, property and lives”. He sketched a moving vision of ”Australia as it could be – an economy running on infinite flows of renewable energy; a society that never forgets it lives on country occupied by the planet’s oldest continuing civilisation; and a country that values education, innovation and equality”.
He went on to log some of the ways in which Abbott’s government has allowed its agenda to be driven by expectations of entitlement. Entitlement to what? Well, broadly, to exploit natural resources for immediate financial gain, entitlement to predator capitalism, whatever the long-term cost.
Ludlam cited Abbott’s ”blank cheque” for West Australian Premier Colin Barnett’s ”bloody and unnecessary” shark cull (over which an unprecedented 12,000 public submissions were received), and his summary cancellation of half a billion dollars’ worth of funding for Perth light rail.
He also cited Abbott’s support for gas-fracking and uranium mining, despite the known dangers and evident toxicity. And Abbott’s determination to log Tasmania’s old-growth forests, pretending that they’re already ”degraded” when in fact only a fraction of the world’s-tallest flowering forest has ever been logged.
And Abbott’s support for Monsanto and other global biotechs, in proposing the so-called Investor State Dispute Resolution clauses for the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. ISDRs will effectively allow these massive biotechs, their clanking war-chests bigger than many state budgets, to sue Australian states that try to legislate against coal-seam gas or GM crops or for consumer labelling.
The writer Tim Winton says WA’s ground-wealth has bred a ”smugness that has paralysed parts of the communal brain”. Ludlam insists otherwise. This is his gamble, that we’re wrong to act ”as though the western third of our ancient continent is just Gina Rinehart’s inheritance, to be chopped, benched and blasted”.
Ludlam finished by thanking the PM because ”every time you open your mouth the Green vote goes up”. In three weeks, we’ll know whether he was right.http://www.smh.com.au/comment/scott-ludlams-speech–worth-paying-attention-to-20140312-34ml1.html
University of Western Australia has resisted intimidation from climate denialists
‘Conspiracist’ climate change study withdrawn amid legal threats April 2, 2014 Peter Hannam Lunar landings? Made in Hollywood. Smoking causes cancer? No way. And as for climate change, better not ask.
Or rather, better not study – at least if the case of a Swiss-based journal is any guide. It means that if a paper is published that the climate deniers don’t like the look of, they can bombard the journal with complaints or threats
Climate change academics say the decision by a publisher to retract their paper examining the links between conspiracy theorists and denial of global warming because of legal threats could have a “chilling effect” on research.
A year-long investigation “did not identify any issues with the academic and ethical aspects of the study,” it said. However, the probe found “the legal context (to be) insufficiently clear”.
The paper, though, is being carried by the website of the University of Western Australia where one of its authors, cognitive scientist Stephan Lewandowsky, was based.
“Sadly, it has turned into a routine for outsiders with no scientific standing to approach, bully, or intimidate journals, editors, and academics,” said Professor Lewandowsky, now at the UK’s University of Bristol.
One person commenting on the Frontiers’ website asked for the ‘‘full details of the investigation,’’ saying the paper had been ‘‘derogatory and insulting’’ by naming people as conspiracy theorists who were ‘‘merely pointing out errors in the previous paper’’.
According to Graham Readfearn ofDeSmogblog.com, the legal threats were that the paper was defamatory.
Scientific rejection
The genesis of the rejected paper was a 4000-word paper in Psychological Science in 2012 by Professor Lewandowsky and co-authors that explored the links between an endorsement of free-market economics and a rejection of climate change science.
Support for free markets was also a predictor of rejection of mainstream science in other fields, such the link between smoking and cancer, the authors wrote.
Endorsement of a range of conspiracy theories, such as a belief NASA faked the moon landing in a Hollywood studio or that the FBI had killed US civil rights campaigner Martin Luther King Jr., also predicted a climate change denial stance.
Professor Lewandowsky and co-authors then studied how internet bloggers reacted to their initial work, producing the Recursive Fury paper that Frontiers published in February 2013 and has now retracted.
“The extent and vehemence of contrarian activity provided a particularly informative testbed for an analysis of how conspiracist ideation contributes to the rejection of science among web denizens,” the authors wrote.
Responses took several paths: opponents objected to UWA alleging misconduct by Professor Lewandowsky; requests for freedom of information were submitted seeking emails and documents; findings were re-analysed to show the facts did not exist; and several theories began circulating “with arguably conspiracist content”, the researchers said.
Two typical conspiracist attributes emerged: an immutable belief that “something must be wrong” and that the authors were engaged in intentional malfeasance”, they wrote.
‘Bombard’ the journal
John Cook, a researcher at the University of Queensland and a co-author of the second paper, said the Frontiers’ decision to retract the work might have a “chilling effect” on research.
“It means that if a paper is published that the climate deniers don’t like the look of, they can bombard the journal with complaints or threats,” Mr Cook said.
“Knowing they have had success once might embolden them to try to retreat the strategy again.” (Mr Cook also helms the Skeptical Science website.)
Kim Heitman, a lawyer for the UWA, said the university had done its own risk analysis before publishing the paper online. “There’s no reason to take it down,” Mr Heitman said.
The university had also received complaints from some groups. “It’s quite relentless,” he said.
“There’s always a close interest in everything that Steve (Lewandowsky) does,” Mr Heitman said. “We are conscious that we are going to be targeted by people opposed to his works.”
The university, though, had also received plaudits from around the world for its decision to publish the paper.
“I couldn’t list them,” Mr Heitman said. “And I wouldn’t list them, having regard to the fact that anyone who issues a ‘thanks UWA’ will probably get their own enquiry.”
‘Spineless’
Elaine McKewon, one of the retracted paper’s three independent reviewers, said Frontiers had been “spineless” in its response to complaints. Kim Heitman, a lawyer for the UWA, said the university had done its own risk analysis before publishing the paper online. “There’s no reason to take it down,” Mr Heitman said.
The university had also received complaints from some groups. “It’s quite relentless,” he said.
“There’s always a close interest in everything that Steve (Lewandowsky) does,” Mr Heitman said. “We are conscious that we are going to be targeted by people opposed to his works.”
The university, though, had also received plaudits from around the world for its decision to publish the paper.
“I couldn’t list them,” Mr Heitman said. “And I wouldn’t list them, having regard to the fact that anyone who issues a ‘thanks UWA’ will probably get their own enquiry.”
‘Spineless’
Elaine McKewon, one of the retracted paper’s three independent reviewers, said Frontiers had been “spineless” in its response to complaints……….http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/conspiracist-climate-change-study-withdrawn-amid-legal-threats-20140402-35xao.html
Indigenous future needs security and independence of The Land Account
The Land Account must be protected for future Indigenous generations By Dawn Casey -Online opinion, 1 April 2014
Connections to and caring for land have been central to the lives of Indigenous peoples in Australia for thousands of years. The Indigenous Land Corporation (ILC) has released a Draft Bill to focus attention on a key land issue for the future. The Draft Bill seeks to strengthen and protect the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Account and mark an important stage in the journey towards greater recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples within our nation.
The Land Account and the Indigenous Land Corporation were legislated together, some 20 years ago, as part of the national settlement following the High Court’s recognition of native title in the Mabo judgment. The Land Account provides partial compensation for the vast majority of Indigenous Australians who are unlikely to benefit from the Native Title Act because they have been dispossessed of their land.
Revenue from the Land Account, which currently has a fixed capital base, provides guaranteed funding for the ILC to buy and manage land for Indigenous Australians for a range of social, cultural, environmental and economic benefits.
As Australia moves towards another landmark—the recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution—we must preserve and build on the achievements of the past. The provisions in the ILC’s Draft Bill, if legislated by the Australian Parliament, would place the Land Account above and beyond politics. Its unique and historic status would be recognised. Indigenous involvement in the management of the ILC and the Land Account would be strengthened. The current ILC Board’s commitment to accountability would be locked in for the future. And the Land Account would be able to grow over time. A stronger ILC and a larger Land Account would ensure greater land-related benefits for current and future generations of Indigenous Australians.
Above all, the Draft Bill would prevent the Land Account from being used for anything other than its original legislated purpose: to buy and manage land for Indigenous Australians………..
………..The Land Account and the ILC were part of the ‘grand bargain’ of the mid-1990s. This was a high point in Indigenous peoples’ struggle for recognition in this nation. After the Mabo judgment, Indigenous leaders sat down with the executive level of government to negotiate. For the first time in Australia’s history, they were at the table as equals in a national matter of profound significance to them. We need to be at the table again. http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=16176
Wiluna Martu peoples condemn Toro Energy’s expanded uranium mining plan
Wiluna Martu peoples against uranium mining, The Stringer, by Gerry Georgatos March 29th, 2014 Elders have condemned a move by Toro Energy to expand their yet unrealised Wiluna mine plan into a much larger uranium precinct spanning 100km and which will destroy ecologically sensitive lake systems. Local Wiluna Elder Glen Cooke said everything must be done to prevent this mine which is intended as Western Australia’s first uranium mine – the first of many.
“The lives of not only our people today are at stake but the future of our people into time immemorial. This uranium mining if it goes ahead will spell the end of us as custodians of the land. It will make toxic the land, preventing us from caring for the land, it will poison the rivers that we swim in, drink and fish from,” said Mr Cooke.
First Peoples anti-nuclear groups have coalesced to stand in the way of uranium mining in Western Australia
But the mine is destined to be operational next year.
WA’s Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) released details of the Toro Energy expansion plan. But Wongi anti-nuclear campaigner, Kylie Fitzwater said that Toro had a long way to go in gaining new approvals in expanding from their single-mine approved project. “The company needs to complete additional environmental management, mine closure, tailings management and transport plans for assessment before any mining can commence at the Wiluna site.”
“But we need to stop this mining proposal altogether which will only risk people and communities from toxic radiation,” said Ms Fitzwater.
“It is not just about the cumulative impacts of a regional uranium precinct covering 100km and two lake systems but about the lives lost, the communities destroyed, and the door opening in WA for a rush of nuclear mad investors.”
“Toro plans to double its water consumption and store radioactive mine waste from several mine sites in a Lake bed.”………..
The Central Desert Native Title Service released a statement on the uranium mining proposal. “The Wiluna Martu People’s previous experience with uranium exploration in the Wiluna region has left them with serious and genuine concerns about the health effects of radiation. It also raised questions about the Government’s capacity to properly regulate uranium exploration and mining on their Traditional Lands.”
“The issue of uranium mining is not something that Martu have invited. Rather under the current policy and State regulatory environment it is something they are forced to confront in order to ensure that their Traditional Lands and their people are sufficiently recognised and protected.”http://thestringer.com.au/wiluna-martu-peoples-against-uranium-mining/
Greens leader Christine Milne is scathing about Tony Abbott’s lack of climate policy
Tony Abbott a fool on climate change says Greens leader Christine Milne WA Today, April 1, 2014 Judith Ireland “………We have a government with its head buried in the 19th without a plan for the nation in the 21st century.
With no plan for the future, Tony Abbott will fail as Prime Minister.
No one can lead at this moment without a plan to address global warming. It is a defining characteristic of leadership to identify the risks and threats to the nation and lead people to address them. The IPPC has made it clear. Time has run out, we are suffering already and are on track for 4 degrees of warming and we are not prepared. The Greens are the only party in the Australian Parliament who recognise the two possible futures, as the IPCC has said: “one of inaction and degradation of our environment, our economies, and our social fabric. The other, to seize the moment and the opportunities for managing climate change risks and making transformational changes that catalyses more adaptive and resilient societies where new technologies and ways of living open the door to a myriad of health, prosperity and job- generating benefits. The path of tomorrow is undoubtedly determined by our choices today. We must decide which path to follow.”
The Greens have chosen the future of transformational change – the government has not.
Nowhere is this lack of a plan for a climate change dominated future more obvious than in WA.
Yesterday’s report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change emphasised the enormity of the global task to avoid climate. In WA, the south west of the state is drying out, and Perth recently recorded its second hottest summer on record and sweltered through their hottest night on record ever, at 29.7 degrees, life will get harder with more heatwaves and extreme fire danger days resulting in loss of life and reduced productivity.
Tony Abbott is a fool to pretend climate change is not happening and even more foolish to try to prevent action that would help people, create jobs and create a future for WA, and the country, after the mining boom………
This election offers WA the chance to vote for a future which takes the science of climate change into account, delivers billions of dollars and jobs in renewable energy, public transport, housing and education, saves money on power bills by supporting solar and gives hope and the promise of happiness to this and the next generation by standing up for people and the environment in the face of the biggest power grab for the greedy seen in generations.
If you’re feeling the “vibe” Vote Green! http://www.watoday.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/christine-milnes-speech-to-the-national-press-club-april-1-20140401-35vnj.html
Lined up against Renewable Energy – These Liberal and National Members of Parliament
MPs unite against ACT’s renewable energy scheme, Braidwood Times, 1 April 14 Liberals and Nationals in NSW have joined forces to send a strong message to the ACT Government over its renewable energy policy: Leave our farms alone!
Windfarms have been controversial in the area surrounding the ACT and an110 tower ‘farm’ is in the wind for the area from Tarago, south across the Kings Highway down to Manar.
Marshall Islands deplore Australia’s backward moves regarding climate change
Marshall Islands minister unsure of Australia’s stance on climate change http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-01/an-marshall-islands-urges-urges-australia-to-take-22leadership/5360510 1 Apr 2014,
The foreign minister of Marshall Islands, Tony de Brum, says he’s extremely disappointed by Australia’s approach to climate change.Marshall Islands is hosting the UN-backed Cartagena Dialogue for Progressive Action on climate change, which includes the governments of 30 countries.
Mr de Brum has told the ABC that the Australian Government should be taking a leadership role. “We have always considered Australia to be a partner in this endeavour,” he said. “Recent changes in political tone when it comes to climate change have made us worry as to exactly where Australia stands on this issue.
“The previous government of Australia (was) instrumental in helping establish Cartagena Dialogue. This week, they’re sending a very junior official to represent Australia. I’m not sure how we should interpret that. “Frankly, it is quite confusing. At first they said they would participate without a flag; now they say they will participate with a flag.”
His comments came after the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that soaring carbon emissions will amplify the risk of conflict, hunger, floods and mass migration this century.
The United Nations report said that, left unchecked, greenhouse gas emissions may cost trillions of dollars in damage to property and ecosystems, and in bills for shoring up climate defences.
“It is tradition that communities be built along shorelines, lagoon shoreline, but now even these areas are being inundated with salt water; areas where gardens and flowers used to grow are now sand and rubble,” Mr de Brum said.
“I’ve extended an invitation to Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and to the prime minister to visit the islands and see for themselves what we’re talking about, so they cannot be naysayers anymore.”
Mr de Brum says he hopes Australia will put climate change on the agenda when it hosts the G20 meeting in November. “They must set the tone for commitment, for progressive movement on climate change and not backpedal on commitments already made.
“We’ve heard from example that, in the upcoming G20 summit, Australia was going to leave climate change off the agenda, because it did not want it cluttered with climate change issues – this is appalling.” High tides flooded parts of Majuro in early March damaging homes and government facilities in the third inundation of the Marshall’s capital atoll in the past 12 months.
1 This month.
20 September –National Day of Action in Melbourne on the International Day of Peace
Help Aunty Sue Protect Her Land and Sacred Sites From Destructive Rocket Testing.
.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 